I just discovered that the problem isn't "religion" - it's deontology

This is why I consider the "New Atheism" movement to be a crock and a fad, since it wants to simply everything as "religion vs atheism/reason, etc".

But I've finally cracked the code and discovered the objective meaning of life and what I believe (beyond free will) is responsible for our ethical dilemmas.

Deontology is essentially secular fundamentalism - it's the idea that no matter what the actual evidence and results say, that a certain belief or course of acting is "always right" purely based on blind faith. While they're are a few things which are so axiomatic I'd define them as basic rights or wrongs (such as murdering the innocent or abusing children) - the end result of deontology as an ethical system can result in extremes such as thinkers being executed for going against the state or the church, as well as mobs committing evil acts supposedly in the name of "good".

While this is an ideology that a lot of religions espouse, it's not exclusive to religion at all. Plenty of secular groups like PETA and deontological libertarians espouse nearly identical views (ex. "taxation is always wrong; killing animals is always wrong, etc). And plenty of atheists do as well - some of them for example believe that people should absolutely not have religion or believe in God just "because" - a view which is nearly the same as the views they subscribe to religion.

So to make the world a better place, we have to do whatever's possible to eliminate deontology, along with moral nihilism and relativism in favor of consequentialism and fact-based ethics, rather than ones based either on blind faith or apathy.

To make the world a better place it'd be useful to stop labelling people and start trying to get along without getting worked up about another persons sexuality or religion or lack of.

You seriously need to ditch the Unabomber avatar. There's a problem that needs fixin'. Find something more pleasant.

Most people would in fact agree with this statement. Now we have to define innocent and abuse. I'll give you first crack at it since you have the keys to the vault and know how to make ethics a B&W issue.

__________________
Letterboxd

instead of indulging in these discussions , why dont the democratic and secular minded folk produce a few kids each . your population is dwindling---making these debates pointless . populate or perish....

The real problem is that most people are ignorant and can't deal with the fact that not everybody else is gonna have the same exact beliefs/opinions as them

__________________
https://t.me/pump_upp

You're such a diatoglamist, christine.

I can't help it. It's just my nature.

This seems like a lot of bull to me. Why should people have to get rid of any thinking mindset? I think that any half intelligent person understands that context matters as much as the action taken, and it's ignorant to say that atheists do this but religious people are clear just by the state of being religious. The appeal of atheism isn't the ability to fight christians or go by different set of morals (both of these things are what religious people with victim complexes believe, but they don't actually represent reality). The appeal is that people would like to believe that they control their own destinies and fate is a myth, in the same way that christian people would like to believe that something else is looking after them and giving them an afterlife. I think there is one statement that we can agree on: There is not a single system of beliefs that can be considered 100% accurate. There are a bunch of viable belief choices that are partly right, so pick the one that comforts you the most.

[quote=ursaguy;1389371]The appeal is that people would like to believe that they control their own destinies and fate is a myth,
[/quote
There's scientific evidence that supports this actually, regarding the relation of the brain to quantum physiques.

I'd say there's just as many who hold on to the myth that they "have no control" over their behavior, since they can feel validated in not improving or striving for more.

There is empirical evidence suggesting objectively better and worse decisions and courses of actions based on objective facts and cause/effect.

So a specific list of things "to do" or "not to do" applicable in every situation? No. But on a fundamental level I'd say there's a singular common purpose rooted in human biology, our human minds sometimes just forget our innate instinct and perceive us as more "different" from each other than we are at our biological core.

People's preferences don't override their innate biology - at its core our sense of purpose is more or less universal and biologically routed, just as it is in other species.

For the record I don't think atheists aren't religious because they want a different set of morals. I think they are atheists because they fundamentally misunderstand religion as evidenced by them saying things like they are not religious because they want to control their own destinies.

I'm atheist because I don't have a practical use for any kind of a diety. I don't see how a belief in one would directly benefit my life. I don't know if I misunderstand religion. I don't follow it, so why would I waste time reading about it? You believe in something, and that's great for you. Do whatever you want with that. Just don't lecture me about why me doing whatever I want is wrong. I never understood why people got into fights and even wars because of differing religions. I could not possible care less what anybody else's religion is. It doesn't matter and will never effect me in my life.

Who is exactly is lecturing you on what your doing is wrong?

In all truth the spiritually and morally minded folks like moi are really the minority. Even the average Joe or Jane who identifies is "religious" is more temporal in practice.

To the average Joe or Jane being "religious" just means attending church on holidays or a few times a week (and getting free food) and occasionally praying for something they really want, and the closest to philosophical thought they partake in is coming to such profound conclusions as "killing people is bad" or repeating axioms like "respect your parents" that they heard from mommy or daddy.

Self-professing secular and religious folk of the common variety aren't really much different than any other - the religious are just as secular when it comes to things they want to do (ex. a Catholic doesn't like having to confess his sins or give up meat on Lent so he joins a Methodist church instead) and the secular are just as religious (ex. treating animal rights or climate change as a quasi-religion and acting nearly identical in their beliefs as a religious fundamentalist).

The only true dichotomy is the nihilistic versus the purpose-minded, and it's their actions that really show this in the long run, not just the creed they espouse.

But hey if the commies in the government want to perish they're no reason they have to make their own kids when they can just use the government and the media to indoctrinate yours - you get to do all the work - taking the kids to daycare, changing poopy diapers, etc - and in the end the commies get to profit from the fruits of your labor through reeducation and submliminal propaganda.

There you go labelling everyone up again..all except toi-même of course who seems to be able to judge everyone else from your lofty heights!

I thought I was being self consciously satirical - ohh

Point is though I think a person's day to day life is more evident of their spirituality than simply what they identify as - this is why I consider things such as church attendance a poor measure of "religiosity"

Your perception of religion and "religious" people always breaks down to these social stereotypes. Ironically this is the same thing you rail against when talking about almost anything else. Do you actually know any believers outside of the internet?

This is an issue I continue to have with your posts. You can't paint people with such a broad brush. You have no idea what an 'average' Joe or Jane is... much less a clue as to why they believe as they do. Turn it on yourself. Are you comfortable with someone painting you with a broad brush?


You presume way too much about other people.

Beware the hubris.

Oh I don't think all believers fit that bill, but I know some fundamentalists who do

Don't you think the same could be said for people in any culture, belief system, or political affiliation? Lack of perspective and disdain for people who think differently than you, especially those we don't know but just know of, seems to be a part of the human condition that is very hard for people to shake. I include me in this. I think everyone fights it.